“Well written and an interesting perspective.” Clan Rossi --- “Your article is too good about Japanese business pushing nuclear power.” Consulting Group --- “Thank you for the article. It was quite useful for me to wrap up things quickly and effectively.” Taylor Johnson, Credit Union Lobby Management --- “Great information! I love your blog! You always post interesting things!” Jonathan N.

Saturday, December 29, 2012

Mario Monti: Succumbing to Power?

He was supposed to have been
reluctantly pushed into briefly stepping in as prime minister in Italy to push
austerity measures through the state legislature.According to Deutche Welle, “The 69-year-old
former European Commissioner was appointed to lead Italy’s government . . . to
restore Italy’s finances following Berlusconi’s departure.” The technocrat was
not supposed to so interested in power that he would want to stay on. At the
end of December 2012, Mario Monti announced that he would lead a centrist group
of politicians against the Democratic Party and Berlusconi’s People of Freedom
party in the upcoming election.Had the
former bureaucrat “found religion” in some political cause, or had he developed
a taste for power? If the latter, we might ascribe the motive to the human
propensity to resist giving up power willingly.

Mario Monti at the European Commission. A launching point for Italian politics? source: nytimes

After meeting with centrist
politicians, Monti went on to claim, “The traditional left-right split has
historic and symbolic value” for the state, but “it does not highlight the real
alliance that Italy needs—one that focuses on Europe and reforms. “He added that his group could win a “significant
result” in the upcoming election, paving the way for his possible return to the
office. Was it the taste of victory or a mission for reform that was behind his
new-found interest in staying on in office? Or was he being pushed by E.U. leaders and
those of other states? He would retain his senator-for-life office in the state
senate regardless.

This case could be illustrative of
the difficulty that people have with walking away from power. Even a
technocrat, sensing a political opportunity, may find it difficult to say
no.The example of George Washington,
who refused to run for a third term as president of the U.S., may be
particularly noteworthy. In the constitutional convention, Hamilton had urged a
president for life. Moreover, Europe was still populated by ruling (rather than
merely reigning) kings and queens. Washington could easily have argued that the
new union needed the stability of leadership that only he could provide. He
could have died in office and still been regarded as a hero.

In European terms, Washington would
correspond to a European with tremendous stature willing to put his or her
reputation on the line for the E.U. That union, being still in development in
2012, was at the time hardly “out of the woods” in terms of viability, and thus
could use such leadership. A problem with relying so much on state leaders at
the federal level is that the interests of one or a few dominant states can
dictate the union’s policy. In turning to Italy after having pushed through the
critical austerity legislation, Monti was unwittingly contributing to this
risk. Just as in the early U.S., the state offices were the most sought. Put another
way, as Monti was preparing to run for the office of prime minister in Italy, Europe
needed him more, even if the power was still in the governor’s office at the
state level.Unlike in even the early
U.S., in the E.U. he could affect both federal and state policy as prime
minister of Italy, given the salience of the European Council (whose members
are the state governments) at the federal level.

Statesmanship can be defined as
turning down an opportunity for greater power in order to contribute to the
greater good.Such a duty is civic and
moral in nature.In contrast, the desire
for a continuance of power represents a more convenient path. It is not as
though self-interest is absent in the loftier route, for falling on one’s sword
(and being able to tell the tale afterward) gives rise to valuable reputational
capital, which can be leveraged for power and money. To be credible, leadership cannot simply be a
reflection of the simple path to power. Put another way, credible leadership
must be oriented to governing rather than campaigning. In the European context,
governing oriented to reforming the system itself has been a valuable, if not
rare, commodity.